Coinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers
since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like
Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

The current range of books. Click the
image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info
on coinpublications.com

Predecimal.com.
One of the most popular websites on
British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and
interesting information.

Everything posted by 1949threepence

I only ask because it's now a month away, it's highly improbable that the lockdown, certainly as it applies to indoor pubic gatherings, will have been lifted. Yet they are advertising it as though it will take place as per usual at the Grange Hotel, Bracknell, with the public in attendance.
I sent an e mail to them several days ago, but have received no response.

I agree with demonstrating peacefully. In fact I'd join them.
But vandalism, looting and desecration of monuments will instantly distract from the gigantic cause the demonstrators have, and cause them to lose sympathy from the masses. It also hands ammunition to Trump. They've even vandalised and looted black owned businesses, and a black security guard was killed by them.
The truth is that the trigger happy US police are out of control. Bear in mind it's not just African Americans and Hispanics they shoot dead/otherwise kill or brutalise for spurious reasons, it's also white people. Although, proportionately, it's mostly black. The Guardian ran a year long article 2015/16, citing every single person shot dead by the US police in those 2 years. Obviously some were reasonably justified, but what struck me was the number of people stopped for the most trivial of reasons, like a defective back light, and who then were shot dead in the subsequent exchange with the Officer. I truly think some of them are looking for an excuse to shoot people.
That's what needs looking at folks, and it shouldn't be lost in rioting. That's a total distraction from the cause, which actually includes everybody. It's not solely a race issue. George Floyd shouldn't have died for a nil end result.

Thanks Ian, that's really interesting. I hadn't realised there were so many different small date varieties for this year. I never thought about Gouby's website and must take a look.
Somewhat surprisingly Peck only mentions different date sizes in relation to 1857, 1858 and 1859. Yet there are obviously a number of others. Richard and John refer to obvious differences with the 1856. Also, for a further example, the pics below show two 1853 pennies with obviously different date sizes. The first darker one is a plain trident, and the other an ornamental trident.
Reading Bramah's book, it's clear he didn't really rate date size variations as being of special relevance. At page 108 he states: "The figures of the date yield innumerable minor varieties of size, shape and position". He then only refers to one such variety in his year summaries, that of type 24a (1857 plain trident) "date in much smaller figures. (Numismatic Circular March 1895, col 1108)"

Talking about 1858 pennies, I've been collecting the various types of 1858, over the last month or so - and there are quite a few.
One thing has struck me with regard to the "small date", which pertains to 1857, 1858 and 1859. The small date is made distinctive by the 5, which is clearly different to the 5's on the other 1858's (same with the 1857 and 1859). I've now got an 1858 small date, which co-incidentally doubles up as an 8/6 overstrike. Now I'm not sure whether all the 8/6's are otherwise small date, or whether the 1858 small dates are all 8/6.
Any thoughts?
Thanks in advance.

Good question. The mechanics of such events are very often not explained.
I went into the easy live site a few minutes ago, and investigated so as to ascertain the precise position. It would appear that there are live auctions of various types every day, and they are listed. I went into one at random, and it is a live auctioneer who you can see and hear going through the bids.
One thing I did notice is that even if you've already "registered" on the site and they have your details, you have to click "register" again on the individual auction, in order to bid in that auction. It's a bit confusing as when you see "register to bid", your first thought might be that you've already registered. If they must choose this rather circuitous route, it might be more logical to say "click here to verify personal details in order to bid on this auction", rather than employ confusing terminology.
link to an auction taking place live now

Theories as to the precise reason why die numbers were placed on a very few pennies of 1863 have been aired on many occasions over the years, both by independent authors and on here. The favourite two being a) to test the die, and b) to identify the individual die operator. But in truth no-one knows for certain, and I hasten to add, are still very much in the dark.
Testing the die strength/quality does sound the most plausible option to me, as we know from very well highlighted documentation made at the time, that die strength was a major issue. Although one would have thought that by 1863, many of the problems surrounding dies breaking had been resolved. Nevertheless, die cracks were still frequent at this time, as was die slippage.
If it was to ID an individual operator, I'm not sure quite how effective that would be (or the point of it), as staff tend to either leave or move to a different area of the business. I'm sure that was just as much the case in 1863 as it is now. So clearly the initial operator assigned to say, die No 4, might have left a few weeks later, then it would be someone else. Although of course, the new man could easily have been assigned a different number. Nevertheless, we only have 4 numbers to go on, and a vanishingly small number of them. So that suggests - and I don't think there would be any dispute over this - it was a very short lived experiment. Started for no clearly defined reason, and ended again, for no reason apparent to us.
As a result of the uncertainty I decided to send an e mail to the Royal Mint enquiring as to whether or not they might know of a possible reason. I knew this was a very, very long shot, as I've absolutely no doubt the same question, or variants of it, have been sent to them on many previous occasions. Also, I knew that to get anywhere, the person dealing with my enquiry would have to extensively interrogate old records from 160 odd years ago, potentially reading a lot of pages, and I wasn't sure how much enthusiasm they'd have for that, or whether in fact they'd just rely on previous stock replies to answer my current enquiry. Obviously one's level of success will vary depending on the skill, intelligence and motivation of that person.
Nevertheless, I don't recall ever reading what the Royal Mint's view was of this, hence why I pressed ahead with my enquiry. Here is my enquiry and their reply, which I very much appreciate:-
So there we have it - not much. Kudos to them for replying though. I honestly thought it might be forgotten with the pandemic having caused so much disruption. So many thanks to Chris Barker.
I did wonder whether to put this in the "More Pennies" thread, but decided to create a new thread, as it might be easier to locate on a google or site search if anyone else makes a similar enquiry. It might well help them.
I did wonder whether to just add to the "More Pennies" thread, rather than create a new one. But thought

Court estimated that something like 77% had been reclaimed by 31st March 1972, and although that was specifically in relation to pennies, one would assume by logical extension that similar percentages applied to all other immediately withdrawn denominations. Although people would probably have been in more of a hurry to exchange (or spend pre 15.2.71) halfcrowns, than pennies.
My own view is that probably something like 85% to 90% of pre decimal currency was eventually reclaimed and melted down by the Royal Mint. But that's purely an inspired guess. It may be +/- 8 of say 86%. Probably a much higher percentage of some than others went for melt. Many will have been held in collections. Many more would have been shoved away in drawers, old clothes, jam jars etc, and forgotten about.
Any other opinions on this question? I think it's an important one as it may provide some clue as to how many of certain dates/varieties remain extant in the present day.

That's odd. I thought I answered this post an hour or so ago, yet it seems to have vanished.
Actually said that I never collected halfcrowns and florins.
Yes, you're right about the 1920 and 1921 pennies. Many of them have very streaky lustre.

The only post 1920 I had the slightest difficulty obtaining in UNC, was the 1924. All the rest, no problem. Although every 1920 I saw, including the one I have, seemed to have a greyish tinge to it. So I do wonder if that story about used shell casings from WW1 being used as part of the mix, is apocryphal or whether actually true.

Both superb photos Blake. Your garden looks great, as you say a riot of colour. I do like those well stocked gardens. Then the robin pic is just so rural. For such a small bird they're remarkably confident around humans.
It was crappy job time for me today. Noticed the number of windows caked in dried on bird muck, and also the drain needed cleaning out. Put it off all day until 7:30pm, and then went out armed with bowl of hot soapy water, sponge and brillo pads. Not the pleasantest of tasks but had to be done, and didn't take too long. Also a bit cooler then with a refreshing breeze.
The drain was a lot easier than it normally is, as the detritus was so dry. Managed to remove it all in a few seconds and just rinse the grating. Mostly leaves.

Hmmm, not sure about that to be honest. When I collected 20th century shillings about 10 or 11 years ago, I didn't notice a great deal of difference in difficulty obtaining high grades of George V both pre and post 1920.
The really difficult ones were Edward VII, apart from 1902 and 1910.

Interestingly, gold coins are exempt from VAT - link
The rest are covered by HMRC notice 362 which basically says that items of numismatic interest over 100 years old, come under the umbrella definition of "antiques" and as such are entitled to a reduced rate of VAT, presumably 5%, although no actual figure is quoted.
Unused postage stamps over 100 years old are VAT free, whereas (conversely and by definition, one would assume) franked postage stamps and coins over 100 years old are not, providing they are not a collectors piece or part of a collection - if nothing else, it might be worth getting this latter point clarified with HMRC, as they could all be described as collector's pieces or part of a collection.
So on the face of it Ian, unfortunately I think it is VAT at 20% for your banknote.

The fact that the US economy was doing well. But the covid 19 pandemic has really found him out for what he is - a madman. Plus his deliberately incendiary remarks following the cold blooded police murder of George Floyd (and let's be frank, that's exactly what it was) has put the cap on it. Quoting the words of a known Miami racist police chief from 1967, "when the looting starts the shooting starts", was not the most positive and harmonious way forward. Quite the reverse in fact.

It's like a maze, Ian, but I did find this bit:-
The above is from the government's website here
Obviously no idea if your item is over 100 years old, and quite how they draw any meaningful conclusion about whether it's part of a collection or a collector's piece, I've no idea. All items of numismatic interest are potentially part of a collection, so I've no idea what they mean. Nor do they state what the reduced rate of VAT actually is.

Looking at this government advice it appears that any VAT charge is made in advance and applied before you can receive the item. In this case Ian has already taken receipt of the item.
However,. despite the government advice, it seems that Fedex routinely bill recipients, post delivery - link to that
interestingly the £12 "advancement fee" is generally considered to be a rip off, and should be disputed - this link is very informative on that score
Was there any reference to VAT on your original SB invoice, Ian?

OK, so from the list of figures above, which is the actual one which now needs to be paid? If I received that, I'd just assume it was a "for information only" notification, because nowhere does it say "pay this", or words to that effect.

Also the seller could either give their personal phone number out in a message or ask the potential buyer to - or maybe the buyer has already supplied their number in the first personal e bay message to the seller.